Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam, 14-25-00930-CV, January 29, 2026.
On appeal from the 280th District Court, Harris County, Texas.
Synopsis
The Fourteenth Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal arising from a protective order after the appellant repeatedly failed to arrange payment for the clerk’s record. Despite multiple warnings and formal orders from the court, the appellant’s failure to provide proof of payment necessitated dismissal for want of prosecution.
Relevance to Family Law
In the context of family law, protective orders carry significant collateral consequences, often serving as the baseline for “family violence” findings that can trigger the rebuttable presumption against managing conservatorship under Texas Family Code § 153.004. This case underscores that regardless of the underlying merits or the sensitivity of the domestic issues involved, appellate courts strictly enforce procedural prerequisites. For family law practitioners, this serves as a reminder that an appeal of a protective order—which is often expedited or high-stakes—will be summarily terminated if the administrative burden of paying for the record is not prioritized, leaving the trial court’s findings undisturbed and fully enforceable.
Case Summary
Fact Summary
Caleb Michael Eugene Willey sought to appeal a protective order signed on July 25, 2025, by the 280th District Court of Harris County. Following the perfection of the appeal, the clerk responsible for the record notified the Fourteenth Court of Appeals that the appellant had failed to make financial arrangements for the preparation of the clerk’s record. On November 25, 2025, the appellate court transmitted a notice to all parties expressing its intent to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless the appellant provided proof of payment within fifteen days. No response was filed. On January 6, 2026, the court issued a formal order requiring the appellant to show proof of payment by January 16, 2026, specifically warning that a failure to comply would result in dismissal without further notice. The appellant again failed to respond or provide the required proof.
Issues Decided
The primary issue was whether an appeal must be dismissed for want of prosecution when an appellant, after receiving multiple notices and a formal court order, fails to make financial arrangements for the clerk’s record as required by the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Rules Applied
The court relied upon Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(c), which places the burden on the appellant to make arrangements to pay for the record. Additionally, the court applied Rule 37.3(b), which grants the appellate court the authority to dismiss an appeal for want of prosecution if the clerk’s record is not filed because the appellant failed to pay the required fee or make arrangements for payment.
Application
The court’s application of the law was a straightforward exercise of its discretionary authority to manage its docket and enforce compliance with procedural mandates. The process began with the clerk’s notification of non-payment, which triggered the court’s obligations under the rules to provide the appellant with an opportunity to cure the defect. The court utilized a tiered approach to notice: first, a standard notification of intent to dismiss, and second, a formal order setting a hard deadline. The appellant’s total silence in response to both the November notice and the January order left the court with no alternative but to execute the dismissal. The court noted that the appellant had been given ample warning that the appeal was “subject to dismissing without further notice” should he fail to comply with the January 16 deadline.
Holding
The Court held that the appeal must be dismissed for want of prosecution. The appellant’s failure to provide proof of payment for the clerk’s record, despite multiple opportunities and warnings, justified dismissal under the authority granted by Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).
The Court further concluded that because the appellant failed to respond to a specific order issued under Rule 35.3(c), no further notice was required before the dismissal could be finalized, as the appellant had already been cautioned about the consequences of non-compliance.
Practical Application
For the family law litigator, this case is a cautionary tale regarding the “clerical” side of appellate practice. Protective order appeals move quickly, and the administrative requirements—specifically ensuring the District Clerk is paid—are jurisdictional hurdles that cannot be ignored. If an appellant is facing financial hardship, they must proactively file a Statement of Inability to Afford Payment of Court Costs; simply failing to pay will result in a quick dismissal. Conversely, for the appellee, this opinion highlights the importance of monitoring the clerk’s progress; if the appellant is dilatory in paying for the record, the appellee can anticipate a dismissal for want of prosecution, thereby preserving the protections of the trial court’s order without the need for briefing on the merits.
Checklists
Securing the Record
- Verify the cost of the Clerk’s Record with the District Clerk within 10 days of filing the Notice of Appeal.
- Ensure payment is made or a Statement of Inability to Afford Payment of Court Costs is filed.
- Obtain a receipt or written confirmation of payment from the clerk’s office.
- Monitor the appellate docket to ensure the clerk has filed the “Record Fee Paid” notification.
Responding to “Intent to Dismiss” Notices
- Immediately contact the District Clerk to identify the cause of the delay.
- If payment was already made, file a “Response to Notice of Intent to Dismiss” with the receipt attached as an exhibit.
- If additional time is needed to secure funds, file a formal Motion for Extension of Time before the court-ordered deadline expires.
- Ensure that any response is e-filed and served on all parties to prevent the court from acting on a perceived default.
Citation
Willey v. Euceda, No. 14-25-00930-CV, 2026 WL ______ (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 29, 2026, no pet. h.) (mem. op.).
Full Opinion
~~544e09c5-dfbb-4eae-afce-bb94933f6ea9~~
Share this content: